The latest research published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition found that saturated fat is not linked to heart disease as we’ve always be told. This latest study was a meta-analysis and did not find significant evidence linking dietary saturated fat with increased risk of heart disease.
A meta-analysis combines the results of several studies completed with similar theories. In this particular analysis, 21 studies were compared in regards to dietary fat and heart disease risk. I do like meta-analysis results, because they can provide a big picture look at the overall findings. However, there are weaknesses.
Here are three known weaknesses:
- Reliance on published studies – Studies that do not show significant results have difficulty getting published. If a meta-analysis only includes studies showing a positive or negative association there could be many unpublished studies finding no link.
- Studies included are not controlled – A meta-analysis may include studies with a poor design which can skew results inaccurately. The studies included in a meta-analysis is a subjective design made by the researchers – they get to decide.
- Simpson’s Paradox – This deals with statistics and how study results are interpreted. There are different ways to measure results and there is no one agreed upon measurement method – with is of particular importance in the field of medicine.
Why am I sharing this information with you?
Because the results of this latest meta-analysis are interesting, but I do not recommend you throw out your olive oil and replace it with lard. It’s likely saturated fat does not deserve the “bad rap” it has received; however, that doesn’t mean excess amounts are good. Everything comes back to moderation.
Please let me know what you think by adding a comment below.
All the best,
Lisa Nelson, RD